Southend Council has agreed to harden grass verges in Woodfield Park Drive, Chalkwell, as long as most residents in the road agree. A total of 62 people signed a petition calling for space off the carriageway to avoid damage from passing lorries and trucks and fines for parking on the grass. But the authority insists it needs at least 40 per cent of residents to reply to its own survey and 70 per cent to back the hardening before work is carried out. Tony Cox, Tory councillor responsible for transport, said: “A petition is great to get the ball rolling, but I think it would be wrong to go on and carry out the work without a wider consultation. “We don’t want it leveled at the council that we haven’t asked people.” The road is the narrowest between Chalkwell Park and Elm Road, Leigh. Richard Caplin, who has lost two mirrors, said: “I’ve got two young children and I don’t let them play on the road, because if they run between cars, there won’t be time for a driver to stop.” _______________ a few points.: Its in Leigh On Sea...Not Chalkwell, and Elm Road is Now where near Woodfield Park Drive, and not sure why trucks even need to go up Woodfield Park Drive in the first place, and many verges are used already and are mud baths. and who in their right mind would let children play in the road.!! and look at other roads many verges are getting parked on and ruined and no tickets given out, why do they pick on the residents here.?

Southend Council has agreed to harden grass verges in Woodfield Park Drive, Chalkwell, as long as most residents in the road agree.
A total of 62 people signed a petition calling for space off the carriageway to avoid damage from passing lorries and trucks and fines for parking on the grass.
But the authority insists it needs at least 40 per cent of residents to reply to its own survey and 70 per cent to back the hardening before work is carried out.
Tony Cox, Tory councillor responsible for transport, said: “A petition is great to get the ball rolling, but I think it would be wrong to go on and carry out the work without a wider consultation.
“We don’t want it leveled at the council that we haven’t asked people.”
The road is the narrowest between Chalkwell Park and Elm Road, Leigh.
Richard Caplin, who has lost two mirrors, said: “I’ve got two young children and I don’t let them play on the road, because if they run between cars, there won’t be time for a driver to stop.”
_______________
a few points.:
Its in Leigh On Sea...Not Chalkwell, and Elm Road is Now where near Woodfield Park Drive, and not sure why trucks even need to go up Woodfield Park Drive in the first place, and many verges are used already and are mud baths.
and who in their right mind would let children play in the road.!!
and look at other roads many verges are getting parked on and ruined and no tickets given out, why do they pick on the residents here.?DogsMessInLeigh

Southend Council has agreed to harden grass verges in Woodfield Park Drive, Chalkwell, as long as most residents in the road agree. A total of 62 people signed a petition calling for space off the carriageway to avoid damage from passing lorries and trucks and fines for parking on the grass. But the authority insists it needs at least 40 per cent of residents to reply to its own survey and 70 per cent to back the hardening before work is carried out. Tony Cox, Tory councillor responsible for transport, said: “A petition is great to get the ball rolling, but I think it would be wrong to go on and carry out the work without a wider consultation. “We don’t want it leveled at the council that we haven’t asked people.” The road is the narrowest between Chalkwell Park and Elm Road, Leigh. Richard Caplin, who has lost two mirrors, said: “I’ve got two young children and I don’t let them play on the road, because if they run between cars, there won’t be time for a driver to stop.” _______________ a few points.: Its in Leigh On Sea...Not Chalkwell, and Elm Road is Now where near Woodfield Park Drive, and not sure why trucks even need to go up Woodfield Park Drive in the first place, and many verges are used already and are mud baths. and who in their right mind would let children play in the road.!! and look at other roads many verges are getting parked on and ruined and no tickets given out, why do they pick on the residents here.?

Score: 6

leighman says...11:58am Tue 18 Mar 14

I concur with DMIL, there have been 'no parking' signs down Rockleigh Drive for YEARS. As far as I know nobody has ever been fined, the verge is an absolute disaster area, and the signs have simply been flattened, a week or two ago simalar signs were put up at the London Road end of Sandleigh Road to deter parents parking on he verges whilst dropping their kids off for school and similarly destroying the verges. Come on traffic enforcement officers, or whatever your latest title is, go and make a reputation for yourselves!!

I concur with DMIL, there have been 'no parking' signs down Rockleigh Drive for YEARS. As far as I know nobody has ever been fined, the verge is an absolute disaster area, and the signs have simply been flattened, a week or two ago simalar signs were put up at the London Road end of Sandleigh Road to deter parents parking on he verges whilst dropping their kids off for school and similarly destroying the verges. Come on traffic enforcement officers, or whatever your latest title is, go and make a reputation for yourselves!!leighman

I concur with DMIL, there have been 'no parking' signs down Rockleigh Drive for YEARS. As far as I know nobody has ever been fined, the verge is an absolute disaster area, and the signs have simply been flattened, a week or two ago simalar signs were put up at the London Road end of Sandleigh Road to deter parents parking on he verges whilst dropping their kids off for school and similarly destroying the verges. Come on traffic enforcement officers, or whatever your latest title is, go and make a reputation for yourselves!!

Score: 10

DogsMessInLeigh says...12:22pm Tue 18 Mar 14

Its a £100 fine to park on a grass verge, theres a few metal posts/signs dotted around saying so on many roads, wonder how many fines have been handed out..? i'll take a guess....is it None, the ones given out in Woodfield are PCN's and appear to be differant.

Its a £100 fine to park on a grass verge, theres a few metal posts/signs dotted around saying so on many roads, wonder how many fines have been handed out..? i'll take a guess....is it None, the ones given out in Woodfield are PCN's and appear to be differant.DogsMessInLeigh

Its a £100 fine to park on a grass verge, theres a few metal posts/signs dotted around saying so on many roads, wonder how many fines have been handed out..? i'll take a guess....is it None, the ones given out in Woodfield are PCN's and appear to be differant.

Score: 6

andyh says...12:24pm Tue 18 Mar 14

If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.

If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.andyh

If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.

Score: 14

Keptquiettillnow says...12:41pm Tue 18 Mar 14

Another hole in the belt instead of a diet. Lets concrete over everything and give cars and trucks the green light to go where thay want.

Another hole in the belt instead of a diet.
Lets concrete over everything and give cars and trucks the green light to go where thay want.Keptquiettillnow

Another hole in the belt instead of a diet. Lets concrete over everything and give cars and trucks the green light to go where thay want.

Score: 2

emcee says...2:03pm Tue 18 Mar 14

andyh wrote…

If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.

Good point. Looking at Google maps, one side is already hardened so I do not see why there should be an issue with hardening the other side to match. Tony Cox is just using delaying tactics with this consultation mumbo jumbo. Besides, a quick consultation should only take a couple of weeks and work could start within a few short weeks after that (considering it is meant to be prioritised). Mind you, as it will only happen "when funds become available" this will probably be months or even years later. Having said all that, there are far more roads in Southend that are narrower that a gnats leg and many of them do not have the luxury of of a verge to utilise in making access easier. Access down all these roads was, of course, fine 40+ years ago but since then every greedy landlord has been allowed to convert houses into flats creating even more households per building. Also, many of these of these households either need (or think they need) more than one car. However, ownership of more than one vehicle can be excusable when you realise that, these days, all members of the family may need to work. They will normally have to travel further to get there, than would have been traditionally the case, and often in different directions. So who can blame them when public transport to their destination is dire. Widening access to roads is one thing but it is about time the council woke up and smelt the coffee. There are just too many cars jostling for position in Southend and Tony Cox would do better to create a radical transport strategy for the future, rather than use piddly little sticking plasters over individual problems hoping they will heal themselves.

[quote][p][bold]andyh[/bold] wrote:
If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.[/p][/quote]Good point. Looking at Google maps, one side is already hardened so I do not see why there should be an issue with hardening the other side to match.
Tony Cox is just using delaying tactics with this consultation mumbo jumbo. Besides, a quick consultation should only take a couple of weeks and work could start within a few short weeks after that (considering it is meant to be prioritised). Mind you, as it will only happen "when funds become available" this will probably be months or even years later.
Having said all that, there are far more roads in Southend that are narrower that a gnats leg and many of them do not have the luxury of of a verge to utilise in making access easier.
Access down all these roads was, of course, fine 40+ years ago but since then every greedy landlord has been allowed to convert houses into flats creating even more households per building. Also, many of these of these households either need (or think they need) more than one car. However, ownership of more than one vehicle can be excusable when you realise that, these days, all members of the family may need to work. They will normally have to travel further to get there, than would have been traditionally the case, and often in different directions. So who can blame them when public transport to their destination is dire.
Widening access to roads is one thing but it is about time the council woke up and smelt the coffee. There are just too many cars jostling for position in Southend and Tony Cox would do better to create a radical transport strategy for the future, rather than use piddly little sticking plasters over individual problems hoping they will heal themselves.emcee

andyh wrote…

If there's a problem with HGVs squeezing through then there is probably a more serious problem getting fire engines through.

Good point. Looking at Google maps, one side is already hardened so I do not see why there should be an issue with hardening the other side to match. Tony Cox is just using delaying tactics with this consultation mumbo jumbo. Besides, a quick consultation should only take a couple of weeks and work could start within a few short weeks after that (considering it is meant to be prioritised). Mind you, as it will only happen "when funds become available" this will probably be months or even years later. Having said all that, there are far more roads in Southend that are narrower that a gnats leg and many of them do not have the luxury of of a verge to utilise in making access easier. Access down all these roads was, of course, fine 40+ years ago but since then every greedy landlord has been allowed to convert houses into flats creating even more households per building. Also, many of these of these households either need (or think they need) more than one car. However, ownership of more than one vehicle can be excusable when you realise that, these days, all members of the family may need to work. They will normally have to travel further to get there, than would have been traditionally the case, and often in different directions. So who can blame them when public transport to their destination is dire. Widening access to roads is one thing but it is about time the council woke up and smelt the coffee. There are just too many cars jostling for position in Southend and Tony Cox would do better to create a radical transport strategy for the future, rather than use piddly little sticking plasters over individual problems hoping they will heal themselves.

Score: 9

carnmountyouknowitmakessense says...2:11pm Tue 18 Mar 14

Drive an old skip lorry down them, to test if a Fire engine could get by, wang another mirror...

Drive an old skip lorry down them, to test if a Fire engine could get by, wang another mirror...carnmountyouknowitmakessense

Drive an old skip lorry down them, to test if a Fire engine could get by, wang another mirror...

Score: 8

Keptquiettillnow says...2:36pm Wed 19 Mar 14

The wider you make a road, the faster drivers will travel along it. Councils should be putting things deliberatly in the way to slow people down, not speed them up.

The wider you make a road, the faster drivers will travel along it. Councils should be putting things deliberatly in the way to slow people down, not speed them up.Keptquiettillnow

The wider you make a road, the faster drivers will travel along it. Councils should be putting things deliberatly in the way to slow people down, not speed them up.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here